Plan B Forum

Over the weekend the Swede and I saw Zero Dark Thirty, to unexpected results. Mister Former Naval Officer/Movie (ooph, excuse me Film) Buff was all gung-ho and ready for the show of American might. I was interested, but slightly apprehensive about the torture scenes. He was surprised I even wanted to go, and enjoyed pointing out the ratio of men to women in the theatre (about 2:1) -- I enjoyed reminding him I'm no ordinary woman .

Three hours later: I loved the moviefilm, found it interesting, complex, nuanced, and intellectually challenging. The hardest part wasn't the torture scenes, it was the opening scene (which I won't describe). I thought the torture difficult but no worse than what has been portrayed on network TV (setting aside the moral issues about torture itself, which I think the film requires us to consider). I also thought Jessica Chastain was wonderful, and that her determination and perserverence drove the film. As you can probably guess by now, he hated it, and practically fell asleep in the middle. He thought it was haughty, humorless, and ponderous, without many redeeming qualities. He also thought there was too much Chastain.

I'm not sure how the movie is being advertised and marketed. Most of the chatter I've heard about it has been related to the torture and the role of torture. I think there is definitely a sense that the movie is tougher, more violent, and less intellectual than it actually is. The Swede and I agree that in some ways, it is ultimately a chick flick -- albeit for pretty strong chicks!

I'm looking forward to seeing it. Thanks for the review.

Ditto.

Doctors always seem to dislike how the medical profession is portrayed on the big or little screen. Lawyers never seem to have a good word when their profession is portrayed in the movies. Police are rarely enthusiastic about how law enforcement is portrayed in Hollywood. So, logically, why would someone in the military have a positive review of how the military is portrayed in the movies?

A suspension of disbelief is the essential component in all theater -- on stage or on film. I suppose someone who takes his or herself far too serious will find fault in almost any artistic endeavor. If the parts were always measured against the whole then the creative process would be dead. The serious need to lighten up a bit.

What RayThom said.

Lighten up people, it's a fonking movie!

So opinions are not allowed if they do't conform to your standards Dale? You obviously missed the entire point of my post.

And BTW, the film isn't about the military, if anything, it's about the CIA.

Spooks gotta love em...

One hand washes the other. The synergy in our highest levels of government is real and necessary and all under the guise of "national security."

Fortunately I didn't miss the entire point of your post. You imply your SO is a bore who refuses to enjoy anything that you show an active or passive interest in. Maybe with the exception of your book club. I don't miss a trick.

I will watch this at some stage but only because a friend of mine is in it...

Guinevere wrote:So opinions are not allowed if they do't conform to your standards Dale? You obviously missed the entire point of my post.

And BTW, the film isn't about the military, if anything, it's about the CIA.

Oh for goodness sakes!

Sean wrote:I will watch this at some stage but only because a friend of mine is in it...

Ok, I'm guessing Mark Strong.

If so, tell him he was great in "The Guard", and not bad in that Guy Ritchie Sherlock movie too.

Nope, Scott Adkins. He was a student of mine once upon a time back in Sutton Coldfield.

Tell him I thought he was great in Holby City then....

LMAO - He's come on a bit since those days...

They're taking over Hollywood and our American jobs. Damn you, Downton Abbey.